Manuscripts should be written as understandably and concisely as possible with clarity and meaningfulness. Submission of a manuscript to the Journal of Tourism, Heritage & Services Marketing represents a certification on the part of the author(s) that it is an original work and has not been copyrighted elsewhere; manuscripts that are eventually published may not be reproduced in any other publication (print or electronic). Submissions are accepted only in electronic form; authors are requested to submit manuscripts (full research papers, case studies, research notes and all other types of manuscripts) through the state of the art eReviewer online submission system used by JTHSM.
All submissions should include author’s and co-authors’ – if any – ORCID (compulsory for all submissions since volume 5, issue 1, 2019).
Submit here (log-in to eReviewer online submission system):
Feedback regarding the submission of a manuscript (including the 3 anonymous reviewers’ comments) will be provided to the author(s) within six weeks of the receipt of the manuscript, through the eReviewer system. Submission of a manuscript will be held to imply that it contains original unpublished work not being considered for publication elsewhere at the same time. If appropriate, author(s) can correct first proofs. Manuscripts submitted to JTHSM, accepted for publication or not, cannot be returned to the author(s).
Full research Papers should be not longer than 8,000 words and not shorter than 4,500 words (excluding references). Research Notes should be no longer than 3,000 words and not shorter than 1,000. Case Studies should be no longer than 3,500 words and not shorter than 2,000. Book Reviews should be no longer than 1,500 words and not shorter than 1,000. Conference Reports should be no longer than 2,000 words and not shorter than 1,000. Industry Viewpoints should be no longer than 1,500 words and not shorter than 500. Manuscripts that do not fully conform to the above word limits (according to the type of the article) will be automatically rejected and should not be entered into the reviewing process.
Manuscript Style & Preparation
All submissions (research papers, research notes, case studies, book reviews, conference reports, industry viewpoints, and forthcoming events) must have a title of no more than 10 words.
Manuscripts should be single-line spaced, and have at least 2,5 cm (one-inch) margin on all four sides. Pages should be numbered consecutively.
The use of footnotes within the text is discouraged – use endnotes instead. Endnotes should be kept to a minimum, be used to provide additional comments and discussion, and should be numbered consecutively in the text and typed on a separate page at the end of the article.
Quotations must be taken accurately from the original source. Alterations to the quotations must be noted. Quotation marks (“ ”) are to be used to denote direct quotes. Inverted commas (‘ ‘) should denote a quote within a quotation. If the quotation is less than 3 lines, then it should be included in the main text enclosed in quotation marks. If the quotation is more than 3 lines, then it should be separated from the main text and indented.
The name(s) of any sponsor(s) of the research contained in the manuscript, or any other acknowledgements, should appear at the very end of the manuscript.
Tables, figures and illustrations are to be included in the text and to be numbered consecutively (in Arabic numbers). Each table, figure or illustration must have a title.
The text should be organized under appropriate section headings, which, ideally, should not be more than 500-700 words apart.
The main body of the text should be written in Times New Roman letters, font size 12.
Section headings should be numbered and written in Arial letters, font size 12, and should be marked as follows: primary headings should be centered and typed in bold capitals and underlined; secondary headings should be typed with italic bold capital letters; other headings should be typed in capital letters. Authors are urged to write as concisely as possible, but not at the expense of clarity.
Authors submitting papers for publication should specify which section of the journal they wish their paper to be considered for, i.e.: research papers, research notes, case studies, book reviews, conference reports, industry viewpoints, and book reviews.
Author(s) are responsible for preparing manuscripts which are clearly written in acceptable, scholarly English, and which contain no errors of spelling, grammar, or punctuation. Neither the Editorial Board nor the Publisher is responsible for correcting errors of spelling or grammar. If necessary, author(s) should use a proofreading service before submitting a manuscript to JTHSM.
Where acronyms are used, their full expression should be given initially.
Authors are asked to ensure that there are no libelous implications in their work.
Manuscript Presentation & Submission (through eReviewer)
For submission of full research papers, research notes and case studies through the eReviewer online submission system, author(s) are requested to adopt the following guidelines:
- Log-in to eReviewer online submission system. After successfully logging-in to your eReviewer account (or, if you do not already have one, after creating a new account with eReviewer), select to start the new submission process.
- The manuscript to be submitted should be structured as following: a) First page should include the title, subtitle (if required), an abstract of not less than 150 and not more than 200 words (please see bellow Guidance on Writing Abstracts), and up to 5 keywords that identify article content. Do not include the author(s) details, affiliation(s), and biographies in this page. b) Subsequent pages: the paper should begin on the second page and should not subsequently reveal the title or authors. In these pages should be included the main body of text (including tables, figures and illustrations), list of references, appendixes, and endnotes (numbered consecutively). The author(s) should ensure that their names cannot be identified anywhere in the text.
- While uploading your manuscript through eReviewer, select as “File type” the “Anonymous article file” option in the drop-down menu.
- After uploading your manuscript as “Anonymous article file”, then upload a second file by selecting as “File type” the “Author biographies” option in the drop-down menu. In this file you should include: manuscript title, subtitle (if required), author(s)’ name(s) and surname(s), author(s)’ ORCID (compulsory for all submissions since volume 5, issue 1, 2019), author(s)’ affiliation(s), full postal address(es), and author(s)’e-mail address(es); please note that, respective names, affiliations, emails and addresses of all co-authors should be clearly indicated. Also, include a short biography of the author (about 25 words); in the case of co-author(s), the same details should also be included.
- After uploading the “Author biographies”, then you may upload – if you wish – any additional files by selecting appropriate options in the drop-down menu.
- Follow the instructions on eReviewer to finalise your submission.
- All correspondence will be sent to the corresponding author (as indicated in eReviewer online submission system), unless otherwise indicated by author(s).
Guidance on Writing Abstracts
JTHSM provides the following guidance to help authors write an abstract of maximum value to readers. Authors are encouraged to follow this guidance. An abstract is a concise summary of a larger work, typically written in one paragraph of 100 to 200 words. Its purpose is to help readers quickly discern the purpose and content of the work. Manuscripts submitted to JTHSM must include an abstract written in English, of not less than 150 and not more than 200 words. Accuracy, brevity, and clarity are the ABCs of writing a good abstract. Writing style: a) Use a who, what, when, where, why, how, and “so what” approach to addressing the main elements in your abstract; b) Use specific words, phrases, concepts, and keywords from your paper; c) Use precise, clear, descriptive language, and write from an objective rather than evaluative point of view; d) Write concisely, but in complete sentences; e) Use plain language, do not use jargon, and do not use acronyms except for commonly used terms (then define the acronym the first time used); f) Write in the third person; do not use “I” or “we”; g) Use verbs in the active voice. A well-written abstract generally addresses four key elements:
- Purpose: describes the objectives and hypotheses of the research.
- Methods: describes important features of your research design, data, and analysis. This may include the sample size, geographic location, demographics, variables, controls, conditions, tests, descriptions of research design, details of sampling techniques, and data gathering procedures.
- Results: describes the key findings of the study, including experimental, correlational, or theoretical results. It may also provide a brief explanation of the results.
- Implications: show how the results connect to policy and practice, and provide suggestions for follow-up, future studies, or further analysis.
In the text, references should be cited with parentheses using the “author, date” style – for example for single citations (Ford, 2004), or for multiple citations (Isaac, 1998; Jackson, 2003). Page numbers for specific points or direct quotations must be given (i.e., Ford, 2004: 312-313). The Reference list, placed at the end of the manuscript, must be typed in alphabetical order of authors. The specific format is:
- For journal papers: Tribe, J. (2002). The philosophic practitioner. Annals of Tourism Research, 29(2), pp. 338-357.
- For books and monographs: Teare, R. & Ingram, H. (1993). Strategic Management: A Resource-Based Approach for the Hospitality and Tourism Industries. London: Cassell.
- For chapters in edited books: Sigala, M. and Christou, E. (2002). Use of Internet for enhancing tourism and hospitality education: lessons from Europe (pp. 112-123). In K.W. Wober, A.J. Frew and M. Hitz (Eds.) Information and Communication Technologies in Tourism, Wien: Springer-Verlag.
- For papers presented in conferences: Ford, B. (2004). Adoption of innovations on hospitality. Paper presented at the 22nd EuroCHRIE Conference. Bilkent University, Ankara, Turkey: 3-7 November 2004.
- For papers published in conference proceedings: Jackman, F. (2008). Adoption of innovations on hospitality. Proceedings the 26th EuroCHRIE Conference. Dubai, United Arab Emirates.
- For unpublished works: Gregoriades, M. (2004). The impact of trust in brand loyalty, Unpublished PhD Thesis. Chios, Greece: University of the Aegean.
- For Internet sources (if you know the author): Johns, D. (2003) The power of branding in tourism. Ηttp://www.tourismabstracts.org/marketing/papers-authors/id3456. Accessed the 12 th of January 2005, at 14:55. (Note: always state clearly the full URL of your source)
- For Internet sources (if you do not know the author): Tourism supply and demand. Ηttp://www.tourismabstracts.org/marketing/papers-authors/id3456. Accessed the 30 th of January 2004, at 12:35. (Note: always state clearly the full URL of your source)
- For reports: Edelstein, L. G. & Benini, C. (1994). Meetings and Conventions. Meetings market report (August), 60-82.
JTHSM evaluates submissions on the understanding that they are the original work of the author(s). We expect that references made in a manuscript or article to another person’s work or idea will be credited appropriately. Equally we expect authors to gain all appropriate permissions prior to publication. JTHSM systematically run submitted papers through plagiarism-detection software (using iThenticate by Turnitin plagiarism checker) to identify possible cases; JTHSM accepts and publishes manuscripts that score as “Green” in Similarity Report by Turnitin.
Re-use of text, data, figures, or images without appropriate acknowledgment or permission is considered plagiarism, as is the paraphrasing of text, concepts, and ideas. All allegations of plagiarism are investigated thoroughly and in accordance with COPE guidelines detailed here.
If a manuscript is based on author(s) previous unpublished work (i.e., a doctoral thesis or an unpublished working paper), then this should be clearly indicated at the end of the manuscript as an endnote including a full citation.
Authorship confers credit and has important academic, social, and financial implications. Authorship also implies responsibility and accountability for published work. The following recommendations are intended to ensure that contributors who have made substantive intellectual contributions to a paper are given credit as authors, but also that contributors credited as authors understand their role in taking responsibility and being accountable for what is published.
JHTSM recommends that authorship be based on the following 4 criteria:
- Substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work; or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the work; AND
- Drafting the work or revising it critically for important intellectual content; AND
- Final approval of the version to be published; AND
- Agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.
In addition to being accountable for the parts of the work he or she has done, an author should be able to identify which co-authors are responsible for specific other parts of the work. In addition, authors should have confidence in the integrity of the contributions of their co-authors.
All those designated as authors should meet all four criteria for authorship, and all who meet the four criteria should be identified as authors. Those who do not meet all four criteria should be acknowledged as contributors (see below). These authorship criteria are intended to reserve the status of authorship for those who deserve credit and can take responsibility for the work. The criteria are not intended for use as a means to disqualify colleagues from authorship who otherwise meet authorship criteria by denying them the opportunity to meet criterion 2 or 3 (see above). Therefore, all individuals who meet the first criterion should have the opportunity to participate in the review, drafting, and final approval of the manuscript.
The individuals who conduct the work are responsible for identifying who meets these criteria and ideally should do so when planning the work, making modifications as appropriate as the work progresses. It is the collective responsibility of the authors, not the journal to which the work is submitted, to determine that all people named as authors meet all four criteria; it is not the role of journal editors to determine who qualifies or does not qualify for authorship or to arbitrate authorship conflicts. If agreement cannot be reached about who qualifies for authorship, the institution(s) where the work was performed, not the journal editor, should be asked to investigate. If authors request removal or addition of an author after manuscript submission or publication, journal editors should seek an explanation and signed statement of agreement for the requested change from all listed authors and from the author to be removed or added.
The corresponding author is the one individual who takes primary responsibility for communication with the journal during the manuscript submission, peer review, and publication process, and typically ensures that all the journal’s administrative requirements, such as providing details of authorship, ethics committee approval, clinical trial registration documentation, and gathering conflict of interest forms and statements, are properly completed, although these duties may be delegated to one or more coauthors. The corresponding author should be available throughout the submission and peer review process to respond to editorial queries in a timely way, and should be available after publication to respond to critiques of the work and cooperate with any requests from the journal for data or additional information should questions about the paper arise after publication.
When a large multi-author group has conducted the work, the group ideally should decide who will be an author before the work is started and confirm who is an author before submitting the manuscript for publication. All members of the group named as authors should meet all four criteria for authorship, including approval of the final manuscript, and they should be able to take public responsibility for the work and should have full confidence in the accuracy and integrity of the work of other group authors. They will also be expected as individuals to complete conflict-of-interest disclosure forms.
Contributors who meet fewer than all 4 of the above criteria for authorship should not be listed as authors, but they should be acknowledged. Examples of activities that alone (without other contributions) do not qualify a contributor for authorship are acquisition of funding; general supervision of a research group or general administrative support; and writing assistance, technical editing, language editing, and proofreading. Those whose contributions do not justify authorship may be acknowledged individually or together as a group under a single heading and their contributions should be specified (e.g., “served as scientific advisors,” “critically reviewed the study proposal,” “collected data,” “participated in writing or technical editing of the manuscript”).
Because acknowledgment may imply endorsement by acknowledged individuals of a study’s data and conclusions, authors are advised to obtain written permission to be acknowledged from all acknowledged individuals.